MSP Got one... Instructor caught cutting corners, permits invalidated.

[Spaceballs]

Did anything in his class kind of tip you off that it may have cut corners? I mean, I understand if you read the requirements and went by the book (16 hours of instruction, live fire, minimum passing score on the target, etc...), but if you were in a 5 hour class without live fire, then that's somewhat on you. I'm just curious what happened in his classes since there's not much out there.

As a lawyer.... would you argue that the state certified the instructor, and that by following the state certified instructor's guidance your client reasonable assumed he had met the standards?

I mean the standard is 16 hours with range qual. But the random citizen is not an expert in state law. That is what he is taking the classes for. If the state certified expert (the instructor) said 5 hours is sufficient, I think someone could argue that a reasonable person would accept that coming from someone the state certified as an expert.

Thoughts?

 

[Spaceballs]

My other concern here is how the state can decertify everyone who had taken this instructor's class.

I kind of see how they could say anyone who was in THAT class where a shortcoming was observed by the MSP would not be certified.

But having one bad class is not proof that all the previous classes were bad.

In a criminal trial you can't bring up a defendant's previous actions unless they show a specific pattern of behavior that is relevant to the current charge. The fact that a defendant robbed 17 houses previous is not admissable as evidence that he robbed THIS house for THIS charge.

How would that same standard not apply to this instructor? Maybe he was the best instructor that ever lived but got the flu during this one class and mailed it in.

I would be curious if the MSP has evidence that shortened classes were a pattern and not a one off incident.

 

[Spaceballs]

And another thing!

If the MSP was secretly auditing this class and observed the insufficiency first hand, would they have had an obligation to stop it at the time?

Or to alert the class members at the time to seek other certification before submitting their applications?

It would seem to me that allowing anyone to submit their application when the MSP knew in advance that the class would not be accepted is a bad faith acceptance of the $75 processing fee.

 

[6-Pack]

As a lawyer.... would you argue that the state certified the instructor, and that by following the state certified instructor's guidance your client reasonable assumed he had met the standards?

I mean the stands is 16 hours with range qual. But the random citizen is not an expert in state law. That is what he is taking the classes for. If the state certified expert (the instructor) said 5 hours is sufficient, I think someone could argue that a reasonable person would accept that coming from someone the state certified as an expert.

Thoughts?

No, that's a losing argument because the law is clear and the instructor isn't given leeway to determine the length of class. If the law was written as "up to 16 hours of classroom instruction" then there may be some room, but it simply says "16 hours." Instructors aren't given any leeway here - it's 16 hours. Being certified by the state simply means that they met the requirements to become an instructor. I wouldn't touch a case like this because the client would likely be unhappy with the outcome and the legal bill at the end of the trial. You'd have a better argument that "the state saw that the 9/21 class was inadequate via audit, but the state can't confirm that the applicant's class in question was inadequate." However, are you going to spend $1,000 in legal fees to prove your point or $300 on a new training and $75 on a new application fee (prints are good up to a year)?

I'm actually more concerned that if anyone submitted an application knowing their training wasn't up to par then they put themselves in a situation where they certified they took and passed the requisite training when that's not the case. The application clearly states:

I do hereby declare and affirm under penalties of perjury that the contents of this application are true and correct to the
best of my knowledge, information and belief and I so indicate by signing below in the designated space. I agree to
supply any additional information requested. FALSE INFORMATION WILL BE SUFFICIENT GROUNDS FOR DENIAL
OF THE APPLICATION AND/OR CRIMINAL PROSECUTION.

I'm just curious as to what corners were cut. Since the cat is out of the bag and the instructor's license has been revoked and students' permits invalidated, there's no harm in talking about what corners were cut.

 

[Jaybeez]

Reducing the number of instructors will just increase the cost and decrease availability of classes. Increasing the length of classes will do the same.
Remember any thing they propose isn't for safety, it a barrier to ownership and use plain and simple.

 

[Spaceballs]

Thorough legal opinion....

And that's why I asked you as a lawyer. Your answer makes sense to me.

I wasn't sure if I could abdicate my responsibility to inform myself of the law by citing a government certified expert. (Even if I know the certification process isn't very intensive)

Would there be a threshold to what a reasonable person could assume was okay? Like if the statute said 16 hours and the instructor dismissed at 15 hours and 50 minutes while assuring me everything would be fine? That seems different than 5 hours vs 16 hours. And obviously what that threshold would be would be up to a judge since it's not codified in law.

(I am not asking for me. I got mine with a veterans exemption.)

 

[FFBWMD]

Reducing the number of instructors will just increase the cost and decrease availability of classes. Increasing the length of classes will do the same.
Remember any thing they propose isn't for safety, it a barrier to ownership and use plain and simple.

This right here ^^^

 

[miles71]

No. Mandatory Training needs to go.

Crappy instructors are the ones who can't fill classes on their own, and need the state to force people into taking training.

Well I can’t say I disagree with this. Many instructors, me included, think training is good but forced mandatory training is not.

If you gotta do it, do it right and within the regulations and rules given.

TD

 

[Tower43]

Well I can’t say I disagree with this. Many instructors, me included, think training is good but forced mandatory training is not.

If you gotta do it, do it right and within the regulations and rules given.

TD

Thats the biggest issue.... Does the mandatory requirement need to be removed? Absolutely. Will it? Probably not in this shit state. However, doing it right is the only way to make it work... if people continue to buck the requirements they will get worse.

 

[Georges2nd]

Hmmm.....
View attachment 380639

As Judge Judy would say "SUPID!!!!"

 

[Phoenix_1295]

100% I am one of Mr. Greens students they revoked 1000s of permits. So after waiting 3 months background investigations all money spent they just sent an email and letter that permit has been revoked. I've been a responsible firearm owner for more than half my life. To make all his students redo these classes is non-sense to punish the permit holders, like another gentleman mentioned your 2nd ammendment right. I'm scheduled to retake 1st weekend in October and I hope afterward we all get reinstated.In the end we all want to be law abiding citizens but this country is going crazy with crime its like a contest who can be the most hateful.Well Ill update after to let you all know how it went, and if we get it back if not its the old saying.(I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6)

What were the non-complaint aspects of the class?

 

[Texasgrillchef]

If you have your NRA basic Instructor certification file and apply to become a qhic. That way you dont have to take any renewal classes nor do you have to take the class. Your exempt.

 

[Blaster229]

If you have your NRA basic Instructor certification file and apply to become a qhic. That way you dont have to take any renewal classes nor do you have to take the class. Your exempt.

This has been said Ad Nauseam.

 

[Threeband]

I heard from a realible sourse that Attenbery and friends are pushing for the required training to be increased to 32 hours in the next session. Should be interesting to see who shows up to testify against this.

That is exactly the sort of egregious infringement that should get all training requirements stricken nationwide, when challenged before Justice Thomas (peace be upon him).

He warned about exactly that sort of thing when he said that absurd expansions of "sensitive places" would not be tolerated.

Odd how the response from many here is, "How can we meet this new 32 hour requirement? Airsoft drills?"
The correct response is, "How can we most quickly bring this new infringement before the Supreme Court?"

 

[Randyinsomd]

May have missed it, but does anyone know what area this guy was teaching in?

 

[Lomara210]

Drew Green was caught by MSP not meeting their standards. They've revoked all permits issued related to his classes. To his credit, he called my buddy (who took his class) and is getting him in with a new QHIC for no cost.

MSP inserted an "agent" to relay back to the state the quality of instruction. Be warned.

Yeah I spoke to this guy in early August and he tried to convince me he could do the training in 8 hours for $380 and it was approved by MSP auditor. He never discussed the live fire portion when I tried to ask him about it. I ran as fast as I could to another trainer.

 

[Lomara210]

May have missed it, but does anyone know what area this guy was teaching in?

Odenton/Ft. Meade area

 

[Applehd]

This has been said Ad Nauseam.

Isn't that the guy they just let out of prison...?

 

[Kman]

I'm so sick of MD. An instructor doesn't adhere to their random and punitive process for a class and is able to revoke thousands of permits.
BS. He was an "ordained agent" by the state in the scheme of things. I've rarely had an inspector (electrical, plumbing, etc) do their job to the extent they were supposed to. Thank God. Most come out, shake hands, ask a few questions, give it a pass and move along.
The state hasn't gone behind them and called for thousands of buildings to be torn down.

 

[JohnnyE]

This has been said Ad Nauseam.

Like I heard an old colleague say, "everything's been said, but not everyone has said it."